Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Basal Analog Regimens in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This study compared basal analog (BA: glargine U100/mL and detemir) and premix (PM: human, lispro and aspart biphasic) insulin regimens in terms of their efficacy and safety in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

Methods

Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL identified primary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ≥ 12 weeks in duration that compared BA or PM insulin regimens in adults with T2DM, with ≥ 30 patients per arm. A systematic literature review and a pairwise meta-analysis were performed using a random effects model adjusted for between-study variability. Analyses were conducted based on frequency of bolus insulin and PM injections, PM ratio and type, BA type, race, follow-up period, and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

Results

Twenty-two primary RCTs with 9691 patients were included. The BA and PM regimens yielded similar changes in HbA1c and postprandial glucose levels, with a statistically significant reduction in fasting glucose [mean difference (MD) - 0.61 mmol/L (95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.90, - 0.32), I² = 89.6%]. The BA regimens showed significantly reduced rates of total hypoglycemia [odds ratio (OR) 0.77 (95% CI 0.64, 0.92), I² = 65.3%] and changes in body weight [MD - 0.48 kg (95% CI - 0.86, - 0.11), I² = 75.7%] compared to PM regimens. Stratification by PM type and dosing ratio demonstrated statistically significant reductions in HbA1c favoring BA compared to human [MD - 0.39% (95% CI - 0.60, - 0.18), I² = 61.8%] or 50/50-ratio [MD - 0.22% (95% CI - 0.40, - 0.04), I² = 0.0%] PM regimens. Other subgroup analyses found no difference in HbA1c change between the BA and PM regimens.

Conclusion

When compared to PM regimens, BA regimens yielded similar efficacies and better safety profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Funding

Sanofi (Shanghai, China).

SUBMITTER: Hong T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6531585 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:This study was designed to evaluate the efficiency and tolerability of empagliflozin (EMPA) as monotherapy or add-on to existing therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS:Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy and safety of EMPA vs placebo or EMPA plus other antidiabetes drugs vs placebo plus other oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) in T2DM were recruited from electronic database Pubmed, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), supplemented by a hand search of the reference lists of selected articles. Main effect sizes were change from baseline on glycemia control, body weight, blood pressure, and complications (i.e., incidence of urinary and genital tract infections, and morbidity of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia). Random-effects model was used to account for clinical or methodologic heterogeneity across studies. RESULTS:Fifteen RCTs with a total number of 7891 individuals (5374 in EMPA group and 2517 in control group) were suitable for this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that significant improvements in glycemia control, body weight, and blood pressure were associated with EMPA application (i.e., monotherapy and add-on therapy) in patient with T2DM when compared with placebo. Meanwhile, EMPA 10 and 20?mg improved glycemia, body weight, and blood pressure control for patients with T2DM. There was no significant difference in incidence of hypoglycemia and urinary tract infections across EMPA and placebo group. Significant reduced risk of hyperglycemia was revealed in EMPA group vs placebo (risk ratio: 0.34, 95%confidence interval: 0.23-0.49, P?<?.00001), except in patients on background insulin therapy. However, increased risk of genital infection was noted across EMPA vs placebo (risk ratio: 2.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.80-3.71, P?<?.00001). CONCLUSION:Our evidence supports the application of EMPA in treatment of patients with T2DM who are obesity or at risk of weight gain.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Dapagliflozin, a novel inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2), lowers blood glucose level by specifically inhibiting the activity of SGLT-2. Previous studies showed efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin combined with other antihyperglycemic agents in type 2 diabetes (T2DM), however, there are few studies for dapagliflozin as monotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin as a monotherapy in T2DM and provide theoretical basis for clinical rational use of drugs. METHODS:We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placbo-controlled clinical studies in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP database through October 2018, we also manually screened list of references to the previous meta-analysis of dapagliflozin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Data search and extraction were completed with a standardized data form and any discrepancies were resolved by consensus. A meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS:Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 2033 patients were analyzed. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin monotherapy was associated with a reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.60%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.67%, -0.52%; P < .00001), fasting plasam glucose (FPG) (WMD: -1.30 mmol/L; 95% CI: -1.52, -1.08; P < .00001), and body weight (WMD: -1.50 kg; 95% CI: -1.67, -1.32; P < .00001). Dapagliflozin was associated with an increased risk of urinary tract infections (relative risk [RR]: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.21, 2.49; P = .003) and genital tract infections (RR: 3.52; 95% CI: 2.06, 6.03; P < .00001). CONCLUSIONS:Dapagliflozin monotherapy was well tolerated and effective in reducing the level of HbA1c, FPG, and body weight in patients with T2DM without increasing hypoglycaemia, although it may increase the risk of urinary tract infections and genital tract infections. This meta-analysis provides an evidence for the treatment in patients with T2DM. However, more randomized clinical evidences are still needed to verify the results.

Project description:Pioglitazone, the only thiazolidinedione drug in clinical practice is under scrutiny due to reported adverse effects, it's unique insulin sensitising action provides rationale to remain as a therapeutic option for managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing pioglitazone monotherapy with monotherapies of other oral antidiabetic drugs for assessing its efficacy and safety in T2DM patients. Mean changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and mean changes in fasting blood sugar (FBS) level, body weight (BW) and homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) were primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Safety outcomes were changes in lipid parameters, blood pressure and incidences of adverse events. Metafor package of R software and RevMan software based on random-effects model were used for analyses. We included 16 randomised controlled trials. Pioglitazone monotherapy showed equivalent efficacy as comparators in reducing HbA1c by 0.05% (95% CI: -0.21 to 0.11) and greater efficacy in reducing FBS level by 0.24 mmol/l (95% CI: -0.48 to -0.01). Pioglitazone showed similar efficacy as comparators in reducing HOMA-IR (WMD: 0.05, 95% CI: -0.49 to 0.59) and increasing high-density lipoprotein level (WMD: 0.02 mmol/l, 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.10). Improved blood pressure (WMD: -1.05 mmHg, 95% CI: -4.29 to 2.19) and triglycerides level (WMD: -0.71 mmol/l, 95% CI: -1.70 to 0.28) were also observed with pioglitazone monotherapy. There was a significant association of pioglitazone with increased BW (WMD: 2.06 kg, 95% CI: 1.11 to 3.01) and risk of oedema (RR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.48 to 3.31), though the risk of hypoglycaemia was absolutely lower (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.80). Meta-analysis supported pioglitazone as an effective treatment option for T2DM patients to ameliorate hyperglycaemia, adverse lipid metabolism and blood pressure. Pioglitazone is suggested to prescribe following individual patient's needs. It can be a choice of drug for insulin resistant T2DM patients having dyslipidaemia, hypertension or history of cardiovascular disease.

Project description:Background: Teneligliptin is a 3rd-generation dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor. There is a limited evidence regarding the effect of teneligliptin. Therefore, this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of teneligliptin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with inadequately glycemic controlled. Methods: A search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library during 2000.01-2018.03 was performed for randomized controlled trials of teneligliptin compared to placebo in patients with T2DM with monotherapy or add-on treatment. Results: Ten trials with 2119 patients were analyzed. Teneligliptin produced absolute reductions in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.82%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.91 to -0.72], p < 0.00001) compared with placebo. However, after 36-42 weeks of follow-up (open-label), HbA1c level rise higher than duration (double-blind) in teneligliptin group. Teneligliptin led to greater decrease of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level (vs. placebo, WMD -18.32%, 95% CI [-21.05 to -15.60], p < 0.00001). Teneligliptin also significantly decreased the 2 h post-prandial plasma glucose (2 h PPG) (WMD -46.94%, 95% CI [-51.58 to -42.30], p < 0.00001) and area under the glucose plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 2 h (AUC0-2h) for PPG (WMD -71.50%, 95% CI [-78.09 to -64.91], p < 0.00001) compared with placebo. Patients treated with teneligliptin achieved increased homeostasis model assessment of ? cell function (HOMA-?) with 9.31 (WMD, 95% CI [7.78-10.85], p < 0.00001). However, there was no significant difference between teneligliptin and placebo in overall adverse effects (0.96 risk ratio (RR), 95% CI [0.87, 1.06], p = 0.06). The risks of hypoglycemia were not significantly different between teneligliptin and placebo (1.16 RR, 95% CI [0.59, 2.26], p = 0.66). Conclusions: Teneligliptin improved blood glucose levels and ?-cells function with low risk of hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM. Common adverse effects of teneligliptin including hypoglycemia were identified and reviewed. Risks of cardiovascular events are less certain, and more data for long-term effects are needed.

Project description:BackgroundCanagliflozin is a new SGLT2 inhibitor which has been approved as an adjunct to diet and exercise for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus in more than 30 countries. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin in patients with T2D, we carried out a meta-analysis of phase III clinical trials to offer an additional evidence of the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin for evidence-based clinical practice, strictly restricting the treatment durations to 26 weeks (core period) and 52 weeks (extension period).MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English were searched in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database (before April 2016). The studies reporting the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin in patients with T2DM were considered. Two authors separately performed data extraction. The differences were discussed and resolved. Pooled weighted mean differences (WMDs) or relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed by using either fixed- or random-effects models.ResultsAt the end of the selection process, 7 RCTs were collected and included in the present analysis. Placebo-subtracted WMDs (%) of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were -0.63 (95% CI: -0.77, -0.49) and -0.80 (95% CI: -0.98, -0.62) for canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg, respectively, from baseline to week 26. At week 26, canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg significantly reduced the body weight from baseline when compared with that of placebo, with a WMD of -2.23 and -3.00 in percent changes (P < 0.001 for both). The fasting and postmeal glucose, blood pressure (BP), and triglycerides were also reduced. These reductions were sustained over 52 weeks but had no significant differences between the 100 and 300 mg doses. The overall safety of canagliflozin was good, with the exception of high incidence of genital mycotic infections and osmotic diuresis-related adverse events.ConclusionCanagliflozin was found to reduce HbA1c, fasting and postmeal glucose, body weight, BP, and triglycerides, and it was generally well tolerated in patients with T2DM.